imagine you find a decedent female that is nude 17 year old white female, and a left behind sneaker that may belong to the decedent on May 30, 1995

specifically,

The body of a 17-year-old new mom had been discovered on the edge of a driving range at the Schenectady Municipal Golf Course in New York's capital district.

Most of Suzanne Nauman’s clothes had been removed and leaves had been stuffed down her throat and in her mouth.

Bite marks covered both of her exposed breasts and a shoelace, which had been used to strangle her, was still tied around her neck.

and

At the scene of Nauman’s murder, investigators discovered a size eight-and-a-half sneaker missing a shoelace that matched the lace used in the killing.

you can't prove that the shoe present on the scene wasn't there before the commission of the crime, or is in any way related to the perp.

in 2014 advances in forensic DNA testing showed

In 2014, fingernail scrapings taken from Nauman were able to produce a DNA mixture belonging to an unknown man.

what is the value of this evidence?

using the following forumsforjustice claims

delmar wrote:DNA? So, it does not match the family. So what? Who does it match? Unknown? If unknown, how can it be known to connect to the crime and be "evidence?" If the source of this DNA were known, then factually connected to the crime scene, then it is evidence. Absence this, it is just more speculation that caters to intruder mental creation.

Does the DNA have to be connected to the crime? Could it not be from a benign source totally removed from the crime scene? Again, the alleged evidence evidences nothing except itself with no known connection to the crime. No outsider as perpetrator is required to explain the DNA since no connection is known as crime related.

delmar england wrote:None of the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder connects to any known fact regarding the crime. All the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder is nothing more that mutually dependent items of speculation none of which go to ground zero and connect to any item of actual evidence. In other words, pure mental invention and illusion without a trace of credibility.

delmar england fraud wrote:The same is true for boot print, hairs, fibers, etc.. A close look into anyone's house would most likely turn up all sorts of things whose source were unknown whether there is a crime or not. To call something whose source and cause is unknown as evidence is to say it causal related while simultaneously saying cause is unknown, thus relationship unknown; more "negative evidence." If my recollection of high school Latin is correct, this could be called "ignotium per ignotius", the unknown by the more unknown.

This "Ramsey defense" "thinking" is a direct and absurd contradiction that is without limit. With this kind of "investigative latitude", I dare say that one could "prove" anything; or at least, convince the deluded self that he or she has done so. "negative evidence?" Surely, thou jest. I repeat: All known evidence is local.

tricia griffith wrote:Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

As owner, I do my best to stay out of actual discussions about a crime.

The JBR case is the one expection.

Websleuths is a leader in true crime information as well as discussion. People come here to get information. It is imperative we deal with the facts. Not fantasy.

All I ask for are facts and a logical connecting of the dots. Logic and facts.

When I get time I will be going through the forum to make sure the JonBenet Ramsey forum is being held up to the high standards just like all our other forums on Websleuths.

The days of allowing anyone to post anything because it's part of their "theory" are gone. Facts and logic. Very simple.

this is her qualifications

Host Tricia Griffith is a veteran radio disc jockey and owner of Websleuths.com and owner of Forums for Justice.org.

in other words she has ZERO qualifications in forensic science. she has no training in forensic fiber, trace evidence, DNA yet she claims

tricia griffith wrote:Anti-K, this whole forum has example after example after example that an intruder did not commit this crime.

No one can show one scintilla of evidence of an intruder.

both forumsforjustice Tricia Griffith and Delmar England, if you apply this reasoning, what is the value of the DNA found under Suzanne Nauman fingernail?

here is the entire story in context

NEW YORK — It was a case no one thought would go unsolved.

The body of a 17-year-old new mom had been discovered on the edge of a driving range at the Schenectady Municipal Golf Course in New York's capital district.

Most of Suzanne Nauman’s clothes had been removed and leaves had been stuffed down her throat and in her mouth.

Bite marks covered both of her exposed breasts and a shoelace, which had been used to strangle her, was still tied around her neck.

“I was there that morning and I can still vividly remember the scene that seemed that day like a case that would be easily solvable,” Schenectady District Attorney Robert Carney said.

That was May 30, 1995, and decades would pass before they would have an arrest.

Nauman's death haunted all who worked on bringing the person responsible for the young mother’s murder to justice.

Suspects were considered, but no lead panned out, and more than two decades passed without a conclusion in sight.

“That fact has troubled everyone who worked on it,” Carney said at a press conference Monday, where he announced they finally knew who killed Nauman.

Diligent investigative work, advances in technology and forensics and an old newspaper editorial led the Syracuse Police, New York State Police and prosecutors to conclude Stanislaw Maciag had murdered Nauman after picking her up on a quiet road while she fought with her boyfriend.

The new evidence also exonerated that boyfriend, Keith Gavreau, who was the original suspect in Nauman’s killing.

Gavreau was angry with Nauman for engaging in sex work and for smoking crack cocaine with other people, Carney said.

When Gavreau, who was also addicted to crack cocaine, couldn’t find Nauman, he allegedly told a witness he was going to hurt her.

The pair reunited that night and Nauman was last seen with Gavreau, who told police they were separated once again when Nauman got in the car with an unknown man.

Gavreau was arrested for with Nauman's murder in 1996.

He was also arrested and charged with the murder of Kenneth Martin, who was found on a sidewalk dead with blows to the back of his head in 1995.

Gavreau pleaded guilty to manslaughter in Martin’s death, but was never charged with Nauman’s murder.

The evidence didn’t add up.

At the scene of Nauman’s murder, investigators discovered a size eight-and-a-half sneaker missing a shoelace that matched the lace used in the killing.

Gavreau wore a size 11 shoe.

“I was not convinced Gavreau was guilty,” Carney said.

Years passed and Nauman’s case went cold, but those connected to it never forgot that the young woman had never gotten justice.

In 2014, fingernail scrapings taken from Nauman were able to produce a DNA mixture belonging to an unknown man.

Police in 2016 again began investigating Nauman’s killing and interviewed close to 40 people about the case.

They came across an editorial published in the Daily Gazette about the death of Phyllis Harvey, whose badly decomposed body was found on an upstairs porch on March 17, 1996.

The 37-year-old woman, who also turned to sex work to support her addiction to heroin and alcohol, had been reported missing the year before.

The building’s landlord discovered her with a rope tied around her neck two months after his tenant, Stanislaw Maciag, abandoned the property.

Before Maciag jumped ship, he allegedly told a friend “that he had a dead body on his back porch and it was smelling bad,” Carney said.

At the time, Maciag was on probation for sexually assaulting a woman he promised to drive from Schenectady to Glenville. He pleaded guilty on Aug. 11, 1992 to sex abuse in the first degree and was sentenced to five years’ probation.

Maciag was arrested the day after Harvey’s body was discovered and was charged with violating his probation. He was sentenced to one to three years in prison for failing to report his residence change, while police built a case against him for the murder of Harvey.

On April 7, 1997, Maciag was found dead in his cell. He had hanged himself with a bedsheet.

Before taking his own life, Maciag told a fellow inmate, “I’ve done a lot of bad things and I have to pay,” Carney said.

“Maciag’s death basically ended the investigation into the death of Phyllis Harvey, and unfortunately the evidence in that case was destroyed,” Carney said.

Maciag’s DNA was never entered into the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), but he had surviving blood relatives, who were willing to submit samples for testing.

The results showed they were likely directly related to the unknown man whose DNA was found under Nauman’s nails.

Maciag’s body was exhumed on July 6, 2017. His DNA matched the evidence found under Nauman's nails and inside the left behind sneaker.

His bite was also consistent with the marks left on Nauman.

Gavreau also positively identified him as the man with whom Nauman left.

“[Maciag] took his own life in 1997, thus escaping justice, but after having expressed his guilt for the many bad things he had done and acknowledging he would have to pay,” Carney said.

Maciag immigrated to the United States from Poland and moved to Schenectady in 1986.

Carney said investigators have contacted authorities in Poland, as well as other places in the U.S. that Maciag lived, and are unaware of any other crimes he may have committed.

“I would think that he had a hatred of women or women engaged in prostitution, which seemed that would be the common thread in all of his attacks, but it doesn't sound like he planned them out or made serious plans for how to dispose of the evidence in the case, so the fact that he would have other bodies that haven't been found over the years, it seems unlikely,” Carney said, according to the Times Union.

The closing of the case comes as a bittersweet resolution for those who had long hoped for closure and who know others who would have been happy to see so many questions answered.

Years after he retired, Det. Roy Edwardson met with police about cold cases that officers believed may be solvable.

“When we were done [discussing other cases] he asked us if we would have a minute to discuss another case,” Police Chief Eric Clifford said. “That case was the death of Suzanne Nauman, and he went on to say this case had haunted him ever since he retired, because he had regretted not ever following through on finding who killed her... if we were ever able to solve this case, he wanted to buy her a headstone.”

Edwardson died in a motorcycle crash in June 2014.

“They take these cases with them,” State Police Troop G Commander Robert Patnaude said of the men and women in law enforcement. “Even when they retire, they still want to bring the person to justice.”

if you apply Tricia Griffith and Delmar England forumsforjustice reasoning, reasoning cynic uk guy superdave et al in the Jonbenet Ramsey case to the Suzanne Nauman would you arrive at the correct conclusion of the forensic value of the DNA taken from a finger scraping in 1995 but only performed in 2014?

the DNA from the fingernail scrapping also matched via touch DNA to DNA found inside a shoe found at the crime scene.

how does this compare with the Jonbenet Ramsey DNA evidence ?

Jodi Sandlerholm murder was also solved with a finger nail DNA scraping from just 1 finger in her left hand.

this claim

delmar wrote:DNA? So, it does not match the family. So what? Who does it match? Unknown? If unknown, how can it be known to connect to the crime and be "evidence?" If the source of this DNA were known, then factually connected to the crime scene, then it is evidence. Absence this, it is just more speculation that caters to intruder mental creation.

Does the DNA have to be connected to the crime? Could it not be from a benign source totally removed from the crime scene? Again, the alleged evidence evidences nothing except itself with no known connection to the crime. No outsider as perpetrator is required to explain the DNA since no connection is known as crime related.

would result in no DNA ever solving any real world crimes, which this case and many others shows to be the exact opposite. DNA in Jonbenet is scientific forensic evidence of an intruder until proven otherwise, not the other way around.

you can make the same denialist claims about the value of DNA from a fingernail scrapping in Suzanne Nauman or Jodi Sanderholm, or the underwear in Allie Berrelez, and therefore conclude those DNA samples have no forensic value, which is the opposite of what really is the case.

Tricia Griffith and Delmar England forumsforjustice are total forensics frauds. they are incompetent frauds. forumsforjustice is promoting anti-science anti-foreniscs nonsense and ignroance.